Women in Global Health Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813792374
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
7725595662
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Leadership Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$93,956
Expenses
$2,840,174
Assets
$2,657,031
Liabilities
$133,098

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROOPA DHATT (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROOPA DHATT (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $245,421 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Women in global health (wgh) is a global movement and organization that brings together all genders and backgrounds to achieve gender equality in global health leadership.

What it reported doing in 2024

Advocating for a new social contract for women in health. Building a stronger, women-led global movement. Ensuring gender equity in pandemic preparedness and response. See schedule o.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 84.5%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2,922.9%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.94; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.6%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 43.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 32.2% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 84.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $245K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $409K reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.